Sunday, November 1, 2015

On Twitter, free speech, and activism.

A couple of
days ago I pointed out Whale Oil’s post on ISIS and Palestinians and his call
to kill all Muslims on Twitter. Giving oxygen to Whale Oil’s hateful rhetoric
is obviously counterproductive and many people responded to me by saying it is
best to ignore. And perhaps they are right. As a Kiwi Muslim, while it is hard
for me to stomach it, I have enough experience with bigotry to know that these
views are prevalent and accepted in NZ and there’s not much I can do about it
by drawing more attention. However, WO (Whale Oil) has a close and personal
relationship with our Prime Minister and several other National MPs including
Judith Collins who has referred to him as a close friend. It is troubling to me
that our nation’s lawmakers and leaders are so comfortable associating with a
deeply troubled and bigoted man and that it is accepted as normal. What I
presume John Key and others would say is that he is entitled to his view but
that shouldn’t stop their friendship. Fair enough. I myself might be knowingly or
unknowingly “friends” with people who have questionable positions but I
certainly would not take political advice for them. And if I was a in a political
position, I would not be texting them regularly and then deleting those texts.
That is what troubles me. And that is why I tweeted that.

Following
my tweets, some people tried to defend his post by saying that it was not about
Muslims but about ISIS and Palestine and that I was trying to limit his free
speech. Let’s make one thing clear, I have absolutely no power to limit his
speech. I only have the power to criticize and that is my right. Some did try
to point to legislation that could be used to stop him and were quickly
corrected on the limits of the law. It shouldn’t be shocking to people, that a call to kill entire groups of people was upsetting to some folks and made them want to
put a stop to it. Bigotry induced desires to KILL entire groups of people
should make everyone upset. Because that post wasn’t *just* about ISIS and
Palestine.

At one
point a person tried to tag WO into my tweets, which I found highly offensive and frankly scary.
I think one of the problems with Twitter is the misguided belief that it is an
equal playing field for all voices. It absolutely is not. There are many many
documentations of transgender people, women, PwD (people with disability), and PoC
(people of colour) facing violent and distressing threats on Twitter and other social media. These threats
include murder, rape, assault, and extremely degrading language. This is taken
lightly by many because it is not considered “actual harm”. As someone who has
faced milder versions of this, I can assure you it is absolutely “actual harm”.
I have been harassed on Twitter, Facebook, and via email. I am utterly helpless
to stop this harassment as it continues to this day and it takes a horrifying
emotional toll. People have told me to leave twitter and stop engaging. I see
this as equivalent to being told to stop wearing short skirts in order to not
be raped. Why should I have to stop using a public platform? And while people
do condemn those who make these threats, they don’t seem to want to make
stopping them a priority. They, however, have no problems using their time and
energy to tell me to leave social media – literally one of the only mediums
available to me to speak out.

I digress.

Under no
circumstances should WO have been tagged into that conversation. He is a
dangerous person who actively tries to destroy people by finding out personal
information about them and using it against them. This is well documented. And
even if one were to be unware of the history, my deliberate exclusion of his
handle should have been enough of an indication that he should not be involved
in that conversation. This person, I am told, now has deleted that tweet.

This leads
me to a broader topic of New Zealand Twitter and particularly the recent
vitriol against political twitter users by some journalists and political
commentators. There is anecdotal evidence that the most politically engaged
users of Twitter fall into the “left wing” category. This has not been empirically
tested at all and is only based on follower counts and number of tweets. Any
number of social media experts can explain that follower counts is not an
indication of engagement. However, most people who comment on Twitter as supposed
“outsiders” are actually completely ignorant of how social media reach works
and its use as a tool. So they make broad assumptions and write “provocative
stories” designed to dismiss and poke fun at Twitter. Bryce Edwards, a political
science lecturer and popular commentator on NZ Herald and on TV has twice used
my tweets in his columns to say that I had been “complaining”. And I’m not the
only one that has been subject to his subtle denigration. I have written in the past with Matthew Beveridge on the use of Twitter as source of stories. “Twitter
reaction” has become fodder for stories not just in New Zealand but all around
the world. Twitter is often first to break on the ground news and every day
citizens have now become “reporters”. My personal observation is that this has
led to resentments among the more established commentators and reporters.
Anyone can now call themselves a “commentator” and that makes some people
extremely uncomfortable. For example, 10 years ago hardly anyone was
questioning media narrative and coverage about transgender people even though
they had been literally dying because of their gender identity. Now that marriage
equality is becoming a ‘settled matter’ in the developed western world, other
LGBTQIA (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, and Asexual)
issues are starting to take prominence. Many people who fall in this category
have been told to wait for their turn and they are now taking their turn and
refusing to wait. Unsurprisingly this makes those who are in positions of
power, those who have benefited for oppressing these groups, extremely uncomfortable.

Allies are
forming. Intersectional feminism is gaining confidence. And one of the most
important tools they/we have is social media. The biggest benefit of social media is our ability to form social movements and groups without the need
to be in the same place physically. This means that lack of funds to travel, lack
of time to invest is no longer a big barrier to engagement. One can have a
full time job and still participate and submit a counterpoint publicly. And
when large groups of people are mobilizing to educate and disrupt the narrative
enough to the point that mainstream media is taking notice and having to report
on it, it is very problematic for those in power. Calls for more PoC, women,
LGBTQIA, PwD representation are only going to get louder and proportional representation
is only bad news for one specific group – white CIS heterosexual able bodied
males. If we were to have a hierarchy of privilege, there is absolutely no
question that they are the most powerful in the New Zealand governance. Whether
it is Cabinet, House of Representatives, board rooms, Chief Executives, media,
business, they are the ones in power. And
so it is no surprise that this group has the biggest problem with alternative
voices on Twitter. That is not to say they are the only culprits by no means at
all. But they are undoubtedly the majority. As for why, my explanation is that
if it isn’t motivated by explicit hate and bigotry, is it absolutely motivated
by fear, fear of diluted power. One of the Fairfax journalist who is
particularly peeved has been Tweeting non-stop about this:

What’s particularly
hilarious is that gossip is not even limited to Twitter. In my experience,
everyone gossips – yes, including men. The fact that people are forming social
groups on Twitter and that it leads to the occasional gossip should not be
surprising or of any concern to him. I have no doubt people say things about me
behind my back – I tweet a lot of ridiculous things. If people want to gossip,
they can. People gossip about people in real life so why should social media be
any different? What is interesting here is the use of the word “toxic” and “cleanse”.
He obviously wants to get a reaction out of some people because those words are
deliberate. I don’t know if he did or not but it is highly disturbing to see
someone who has access to one of the most powerful communication platforms in
New Zealand – Fairfax – try to shut down opinions of the general public on
Twitter.

On Twitter!

Twitter,
which has been declared a left wing echo chamber, apparently needs cleaning out
because the conversation is not to his liking. How ironic and how pitiful. Schrodinger’s
Twitter has managed to be utterly pointless and all powerful all at the same
time depending on whether they have a story they need to write and they can’t
think of a topic. The discomfort that he is feeling isn’t limited to him.

White
feminists are being forced to think about other kinds of misogyny and while
there is some resistance, there is a lot of positive collaboration happening. I
am hopeful. As a PoC feminist, I think allies are important. And there are a
good number of cis white heterosexual men on Twitter and in life are helpful
allies. But the sheer number of people from this group who don’t want to listen,
change ingrained behaviours that are proven harmful, and make room for alternate
viewpoints that challenge the status quo is apparent.

I was not
always this person. When I was 15, I firmly believed being gay was wrong. I had
been raised to believe that and in fact I had such a sheltered life that I didn’t
even know gay people existed before I was 15. Obviously that changed and when I
made the effort to think about it on a logical and rational level, I was forced
to abandon my utterly bigoted beliefs. When I try to think about this change, I
don’t recall feeling personally attacked when people tried to explain to me why
my beliefs were misguided. Instead of questioning the people and their experiences,
I questioned my religion and my faith. If my faith could not accommodate accepting
people as they want to be, as who they are, with all the equal rights and
freedoms that I had, then I had to rethink my own worldview. But most people
don’t want to do the same because faith is seen as irreproachable and the absolute
truth despite the fact that there are thousands of religions in the world with
different interpretations of God. And those who are not guided by faith are
guided by some other ingrained value that they are unwilling to question. In
the end it is all the same.

I am not
going to lie, there were a couple of extremely uncomfortable years as I tried to
reconcile the accepted bigoted beliefs that were prevalent in my faith and my
rational conclusions of the world. And I think my views are still being
challenged. Twitter is the first place I learned about non-binary folks. After
being raised and having lived in a society that are so rigidly divided by
genders with particular gender norms ingrained into my brain, getting out of that
viewpoint took some thought. There were times I may have said things that were
probably not the right things to say and there were times I assumed gender
identity of people that was not right. I was wrong. There is no way around it.
And I’m still learning. I go about my fairly comfortable life, working,
Tweeting, instagramming lunch like very other millennial and sometimes someone
writes a post on chronic illness/pain or struggle with depression/anxiety and I
am forced to think about how privileged I am – this is a good thing. This
forces me to think about the kind of changes I want to see in our society to
ease the suffering. As a student of public policy, it forces me to think about
people I wouldn’t think to think about first. Social media gives me the chance
to testify and amplify. I can share my experiences and challenges of trying to
be seen as an equal member of the society and I can amplify the voices who are
facing other kinds of experiences and challenges. And then, there was also this:

What he fails to understand is perfectly summed up by his colleague at NZ Herald:

Social media
is not an absolute safe place but it is a great place to bring and challenge
voices. The idea that nobody can be corrected or that groups shouldn’t create
rules or conventions to make it safe and minimize the risk, is ludicrous and in no way is "bullying". We are not going to be
tagging in dangerous people into our conversations just because we are talking
about them. We are going to point out
when some speech is offensive and dangerous. What we do will make certain
privileged groups uncomfortable. Change has never been comfortable. So no, you
can’t ‘cleanse Twitter’. And no, ‘Twitter’ isn’t toxic, denigration of
marginalized groups for speaking out is. Here’s the thing – if you don’t like
it, you are more than welcome to show yourself out. They will no doubt continue
to put you on TV and radio and print your columns and people who look like you and represent your interests will continue to run this country. The rest of us don't have that luxury.

The verification system does have a sensible reason. Twitter brims with bogus or parody accounts. So when consumers are sifting as a result of an index of prospective usernames, it can help to obtain alerts to assist discover the actual particular person they need to follow. twitter blue badge